
The Calcutta High Court held that a writ petition cannot be used to stop personal insolvency proceedings under Section 95 of the IBC, since the Code provides a complete statutory mechanism with appellate remedies.
The Court said that issues relating to default, recall notices and RBI norms must be decided by the NCLT, where both the Section 7 case against the borrower and Section 95 proceedings against the guarantors are pending.
It noted that Piramal Finance and the security trustee are private entities not amenable to writ jurisdiction and that the petitioners have an alternative remedy before NCLT.
[Sanjay Jhunjhunwala v. Piramal Finance]
MahiraBookmark